Welcome to an Engaged Community

There's a better way to personalize your website experience. With myConnection, the profile you create allows you to set up a unique starting point for the tasks and transactions that you want to complete in your time on this website. Use myConnection to gather the information that you most care about from across this website into one central location, giving you greater control over how you connect with your community.

A.Hold a public hearing and take
action on HC16-08,
(610 East Main Street), a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness
to install a changeable letter board wall sign on the structure at 610 East
Main Street.

IV.Commissioners’ Comments

V.Staff Comments

VI.Adjournment

CERTIFICATE

THIS IS TO CERTIFY
THAT THE ABOVE NOTICE OF MEETING WAS POSTED ON THE BULLETIN BOARD AT CITY HALL
OF THE CITY OF LEAGUE CITY, TEXAS, ON OR BEFORE THE 16h DAY OF MAY 2016,
BY 6 PM, AND WAS POSTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 551, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE
(THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT). ITEMS POSTED IN THE OPEN SESSION PORTIONS OF
THIS AGENDA MAY ALSO BE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED OR EXECUTIVE SESSION IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

NOTICE IS HEREBY
GIVEN THAT THE PRESENCE OF A QUORUM OF THE MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL AT ANY TIME
DURING THE COURSE OF THE ABOVE-REFERENCED PROCEEDING MAY CONSTITUTE A MEETING
OF CITY COUNCIL PURSUANT TO THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT, CHAPTER 551 OF THE
TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. BY THIS NOTICE, THE PUBLIC IS HEREBY ADVISED OF SAID
MEETING NOT LESS THAN 72 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE DATE, TIME AND LOCATION NOTED
ABOVE.

City Representatives:Richard Werbiskis, Assistant Director of Planning and Zoning

*Mr. Hendershot arrived at 6:20 PM.

II.Approval of Minutes

A.January 21, 2016

Mr. Calkins made a motion to approve the minutes of January 21, 2016 minutes.

Mr. Hake seconded the motion.

The motion passed unanimously by a vote of 3-0-*1.

*Ms. Hetico abstained from voting.

B.April 21, 2016

Mr. Hake made a motion to approve the minutes of April 21, 2016 minutes.

Ms. Hetico seconded the motion.

The motion passed unanimously by a vote of 3-0-*1.

*Ms. McDougal abstained from voting.

III.Public Hearing & Action Items

A.Hold a public hearing and take action on HC16-08, (610 East Main Street), a request for a
Certificate of Appropriateness to install a changeable letter board wall sign on the structure at 610
East Main Street.

Richard Werbiskis, Assistant Director of Planning and Zoning, presentedfor the City of League City, and City staff recommended approval, with the condition that the sign be constructed as a finished, non-internally illuminated box sign.

Ms. McDougal asked for the dimensions of the gables that the sign is proposed to be posted on.

Mr. Werbiskis commented that he was not sure.

Ms. McDougal asked what type of siding was being used.

Mr. Werbiskis stated that he did not do an investigation of the property to obtain that information.

Ms. McDougal asked if the applicant had disclosed how the sign will be affixed to the building.

Mr. Werbiskis stated that it would most likely be affixed with bolts.

Mr. Hake asked when the property will exceed their amount of permissible signage.

Mr. Werbiskis stated that they are allowed 1.5 square feet of signage per the face of the building, which means they could put up more signage.

Mr. Hake asked if that includes the signs they currently have.

Mr. Werbiskis stated that the small teacups do not confirm with zoning.

Mr. Hake asked if the balloons are allowed.

Mr. Werbiskis stated no, they are not allowed, and code enforcement actions will be taken.

Ms. McDougal commented that the consideration for the sign should be taken on its own.

Mr. Hake asked if the sign meets the design criteria if it is boxed in.

Mr. Werbiskis stated that he is leaving that to the Commission to decide because the Design Guidelines are loosely written, on what is permissible and what is not.

Mr. Hake asked about the other properties where this type of signage is used.

Mr. Werbiskis stated that the applicant wanted to show where other similar signs were being used in the Historic District.

Mr. Hake stated that each one was put up prior to the creation of the Historic District, and are grandfathered in.

Mr. Werbiskis stated that he has informed the applicant of that, and that it has no bearing on this item.

Mr. Werbiskis commented that the guidelines list acrylic and vinyl as appropriate materials.

The applicant did not attend the meeting.

The public hearing was opened at 6:20 PM.

The public hearing was closed at 6:20 PM.

Ms. Hetico made a motion to approve HC16-08, (610 East Main Street), request for a Certificate of Appropriateness.

Mr. Hake seconded the motion.

Ms. McDougal stated that she would have to see an actual sketch with the width, to-scale, indicating the size of the sign, where the sign is being placed, how it is going to be affixed to the building, the material being used on the siding, and the measurement the applicant would take to prevent moisture from entering the building where the sign is affixed.

Ms. McDougal commented that a building gable may not be an appropriate location for a changeable sign and that type of would be better placed on a monument rather than affixed to a historic building.

Mr. Hendershot seconded Ms. McDougal’s comments, and that the placement of the sign s and the unknown information about the project make it a difficult situation.

Mr. Calkins commented that there was not enough room for the sign to be placed on the east gable.

Ms. Hetico commented that when they refined the design guidelines, they decided these types would no longer be allowed in the Historic District, and all the referenced signs are signs they do not want in the Historic District because the letters fall out, the signs are not well maintained, it is not historic, it covers the gables, which give the building historic character, and the signs will detract from that.

Mr. Hake agreed and commented that it does not fit the character of the neighborhood or the character of the business type, and does not follow the intent of the guidelines.

The motion was denied unanimously by a vote of 0-4-0.

IV.Old Business

Ms. McDougal asked if there was any old business.

Mr. Werbiskis commented that the only old business is finding staff to support the Commission in getting the Design Guidelines updated, and there is a lot of projects that are going to pick up for the Main Street project in June.

Ms. McDougal asked about when All About Plumbing would be presented before them again.

Mr. Werbiskis stated that he was not sure, but he would look into it.

Ms. Hetico asked about All About Plumbing paving to the sidewalk.

Ms. McDougal asked if there has been a stop work order issued on the property.

Mr. Werbiskis stated yes.

Ms. McDougal stated that the commissioners wanted to know why City engineers stated that pavement would be fine, when everything else in the Historic District is required to be permeable pavement, and the commissioners have not received an answer on that.

Mr. Werbiskis stated he would try to find out by the next meeting.

V.Commissioner Comments

Mr. Hake suggested that the other commissioners watch the May 10th, City Council Downtown District Revitalization Plan meeting.

Ms. Hetico stated that she was concerned about the basketball court being removed.

Mr. Calkins asked if the commission was going to give a presentation to the City Council about F.M. 518 revitalization.

Mr. Werbiskis stated yes.

Mr. Hake commented that he could help with the code.

Ms. McDougal stated they have an action plan that they would like to move forward with, and setup a meeting with the City Manager, the Planning Director, and the City Attorney, by June 30th, to make a plan for implementing action plan items such as fixing the ordinance, revamping the design guidelines, and getting an historic inventory together. Ms. McDougal also commented that she would like to setup a workshop in June or July, for the commissioners to sketch out a plan to proceed through the projects, the timeframes, and to engage the public in this effort, and the desire is to have the workshop outside of the hearing.

VI.Staff Comments

VII.AdjournmentThe Meeting was adjourned at 6:39 PM.

CERTIFICATE

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE ABOVE NOTICE OF MEETING WAS POSTED ON THE BULLETIN BOARD AT CITY HALL OF THE CITY OF LEAGUE CITY, TEXAS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 551, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE (THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT). ITEMS POSTED IN THE OPEN SESSION PORTIONS OF THIS AGENDA MAY ALSO BE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED OR EXECUTIVE SESSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE PRESENCE OF A QUORUM OF THE MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL AT ANY TIME DURING THE COURSE OF THE ABOVE-REFERENCED PROCEEDING MAY CONSTITUTE A MEETING OF CITY COUNCIL PURSUANT TO THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT, CHAPTER 551 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. BY THIS NOTICE, THE PUBLIC IS HEREBY ADVISED OF SAID MEETING NOT LESS THAN 72 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE DATE, TIME AND LOCATION NOTED ABOVE.